Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!

All, I am trying to figure out what height my riser needs to be and I am kinda flying blind here. I know the following variables.

I plan on using a Benq W1070 for my PJ and I have mounting flexibility to place it between 11-17' from the screen. I know I will have a row of three Berkline Tangiers on a riser at roughly 18', the riser will be 7' long and 10' wide. I know the front row will sit as close to the front of the riser as possible so let's call it 11' for the front row. Based on BIG and other comments and I can verify this tonight at home I think my seated viewing height will be 38" (42" to top of heads seated, account for some sinking into the recliners). I also will have bar seating behind the riser that will not rest on the riser as my riser will simply be a "box" in the middle of the room to elevate the 2nd row seats. The bar will be most likely 42" tall and I'm not worried about folks at the bar having partially obstructed views as much as I am the second row.

I plan on using a 16x9 AT screen that will be 130" WIDE, not diagonal. Any help is appreciated as I need to get this done so I can order my carpet.

All, I am trying to figure out what height my riser needs to be and I am kinda flying blind here. I know the following variables.

I plan on using a Benq W1070 for my PJ and I have mounting flexibility to place it between 11-17' from the screen. I know I will have a row of three Berkline Tangiers on a riser at roughly 18', the riser will be 7' long and 10' wide. I know the front row will sit as close to the front of the riser as possible so let's call it 11' for the front row. Based on BIG and other comments and I can verify this tonight at home I think my seated viewing height will be 38" (42" to top of heads seated, account for some sinking into the recliners). I also will have bar seating behind the riser that will not rest on the riser as my riser will simply be a "box" in the middle of the room to elevate the 2nd row seats. The bar will be most likely 42" tall and I'm not worried about folks at the bar having partially obstructed views as much as I am the second row.

I plan on using a 16x9 AT screen that will be 130" WIDE, not diagonal. Any help is appreciated as I need to get this done so I can order my carpet.

There is a riser calculator somewhere on here, but couldn't find it off hand. One other input is the "height of of bottom of screen", and this I believe is the screen itself (not the black velvet surround material). The higher the bottom of the screen, the lower the riser and lower the bottom of the screen, the higher the riser.

A 130" wide makes for an ~ 73" image height, so, depending on your ceiling height and whether you are using a stage, that could make for a higher riser! A question out of curiosity, will you use the 130" wide for 16:9 reasons... or, use 130: wide for 2.35:1 and then when viewing 16:9 material, be able to use more 'height' on the screen.

I am leaning towards a 130" wide, 2.35:1, but don't like that it makes the 16:9 max image smaller, I was thinking of doing a DIY that could make the screen 'taller' so, I could have a larger 16:9 image, but maybe an easier way is just ordering the 130" wide 16:9, of course, causing larger bars on top/bottom of the 2.35 image at 130" wide.

There is a riser calculator somewhere on here, but couldn't find it off hand. One other input is the "height of of bottom of screen", and this I believe is the screen itself (not the black velvet surround material). The higher the bottom of the screen, the lower the riser and lower the bottom of the screen, the higher the riser.

A 130" wide makes for an ~ 73" image height, so, depending on your ceiling height and weather you are using a stage, that could make for a higher riser! A question out of curiosity, will you use the 130" wide for 16:9 reasons... or, use 130: wide for 2.35:1 and then when viewing 16:9 material, be able to use more 'height' on the screen.

I am leaning towards a 130" wide, 2.35:1, but don't like that it makes the 16:9 max image smaller, I was thinking of doing a DIY that could make the screen 'taller' so, I could have a larger 16:9 image, but maybe an easier way is just ordering the 130" wide 16:9, of course, causing larger bars on top/bottom of the 2.35 image at 130" wide.

I am going to play around with the riser calculator at home, can't access it now. When I used BenQ's throw calculator it says the screen will be about 20" from the floor. I am going to do a DIY 16:9 screen that will be about 73" tall. I did the calculation using the Carlton Bale v3.3 calculator and it tells me I need a 19" riser. That seems a bit crazy.

my only question is around the projector in how that factors into the riser height. At some point my riser raises my head into the picture.

I really wish I could figure out a cheap and dirty way to build a temporary riser so I could play with different heights. I suppose a stack of drywall with a sheet of plywood on top would probably do the trick. But that's not necessarily cheap or easy to deal with.

Does this calculator assume an upright position as opposed to a reclined one?

I don't know with any certainty, but my assumption has always been it assumes a 'similar recline' between the two rows. So, if both rows are fully reclined or both rows are fully upright, I would think line-of-site would be similar.

I would guess if your 2nd row was fully upright, and the front row fully reclined - the riser height would need to be less. However, my hope is at minimum, the calculator determines a riser height that doesn't require the front row to be reclined.

So, a next question could be can the 2nd row be reclined and front row be up-right' and does the calculator cover for that?? That would be 'best case'..

I don't know with any certainty, but my assumption has always been it assumes a 'similar recline' between the two rows. So, if both rows are fully reclined or both rows are fully upright, I would think line-of-site would be similar.

I would guess if your 2nd row was fully upright, and the front row fully reclined - the riser height would need to be less. However, my hope is at minimum, the calculator determines a riser height that doesn't require the front row to be reclined.

So, a next question could be can the 2nd row be reclined and front row be up-right' and does the calculator cover for that?? That would be 'best case'..

That would be best case, but in those instances, I would think the riser heights would get to be fairly extreme in some cases. I found that if the seats in both rows are reclined, the calculated riser height needed is much less than if they are both upright.

I have it, but it is .xls which can't be attached below. If you haven't gotten it from someone else that knows how to use a ^$% computer to get around these things, send me a PM and I 'think' I can email it to you.

I have it, but it is .xls which can't be attached below. If you haven't gotten it from someone else that knows how to use a ^$% computer to get around these things, send me a PM and I 'think' I can email it to you.

Thanks Jim,

Not needed by me, as I've already used it, and my riser will be well in excess of what's required. But for others, it sucks that someone is trying take advantage of an idle domain.....or so it seems.

I have it, but it is .xls which can't be attached below. If you haven't gotten it from someone else that knows how to use a ^$% computer to get around these things, send me a PM and I 'think' I can email it to you.